Still collecting or downsizing?

Sounds like a good deal all round.

yes everyone is happy, the trick is to not flood the market

I'm now wondering who they are. Goldsmith perhaps?

if I told you I would have to kill you

climberg64 wrote:I agree Naomiabout studio pottery straight from the potter. You're very unlikely to get your money back. You're just doing them a favour really, but without them, no future pots and they've gotta make a living.

It very much depends on what you buy. A fair percentage of the "new stock" I buy these days is actually items that were bought from my exhibitions held between 1999 and 2009 that I now buy back for more than I had originally sold them for.

It is certainly not the case with every potter I exhibited though.

dantheman wrote:

climberg64 wrote:I agree Naomiabout studio pottery straight from the potter. You're very unlikely to get your money back. You're just doing them a favour really, but without them, no future pots and they've gotta make a living.

not always the case, I buy directly from 2 potters and I always double my money, even if I sell the same week

Yes, well, if you're shmoozing them, and buying several at a time I expect you can get a great deal; sell on the ones you don't want and keep a few for the collection pretty much free of charge.

Every so often I ge fed up of the quality of items available at fairs and charity shops and splash out on something direct from the potter, just so I can get exactly what I want, in my price range.

I wish I'd bought some of Harry Juniper's harvest pots a few years ago. they're now double the price.

NaomiM wrote:

dantheman wrote:

climberg64 wrote:I agree Naomiabout studio pottery straight from the potter. You're very unlikely to get your money back. You're just doing them a favour really, but without them, no future pots and they've gotta make a living.

not always the case, I buy directly from 2 potters and I always double my money, even if I sell the same week

Yes, well, if you're shmoozing them, and buying several at a time I expect you can get a great deal; sell on the ones you don't want and keep a few for the collection pretty much free of charge.

Every so often I ge fed up of the quality of items available at fairs and charity shops and splash out on something direct from the potter, just so I can get exactly what I want, in my price range.

that's exactly right Naomi and they're not easily schmoozed I can tell you

NaomiM wrote:

dantheman wrote:

climberg64 wrote:I agree Naomiabout studio pottery straight from the potter. You're very unlikely to get your money back. You're just doing them a favour really, but without them, no future pots and they've gotta make a living.

not always the case, I buy directly from 2 potters and I always double my money, even if I sell the same week

Yes, well, if you're shmoozing them, and buying several at a time I expect you can get a great deal; sell on the ones you don't want and keep a few for the collection pretty much free of charge.

Every so often I ge fed up of the quality of items available at fairs and charity shops and splash out on something direct from the potter, just so I can get exactly what I want, in my price range.

Buying directly from the potter, as a member of the public, is not always the best option as they rarely, if ever, have their best pots in their showrooms or at the various fairs. So you end up paying a little less or maybe the same price that you would from an exhibition where the pots they keep for such occasions are shown.

Well the caveat 'in my price range' sort of rules out the exhibition quality stuff.

Many potters have no conception of the real financial "worth" or collectability of their
wares as such, too busy with the creative side. At an exhibition they will all be priced
up, probably by the gallery. If they are amenable, buying direct can be good.

denbydump wrote:Many potters have no conception of the real financial "worth" or collectability of their
wares as such, too busy with the creative side. At an exhibition they will all be priced
up, probably by the gallery. If they are amenable, buying direct can be good.

From my own experience I have to disagree completely - hope that doesn't sound too much like sitting on the fence?

It could be said in the past that I had a vested interest in saying that but that doesn't apply these days.

Well I suppose it depends if they are seriously trying to earn a living, or just potting
for pleasure.

I think what you said DD was true for some of the older potters around 20 years ago but in my time of running a gallery where I staged solo exhibitions of new work usually by individual potters (1999 -2009) I can only think of two, who that applied to.

My biggest personal moan (to myself) was that potters tried to keep their retail prices fairly consistent to the public, wherever their pots were sold. Something that from their point of view makes extremely good sense.

From mine it didn't, especially as I was based in London and most of the potters I exhibited were members of the CPA (Craft Potters' Association). If the potters had allowed me to have the pots at the same wholesale price as they got when their pots were sold in the CPA gallery then the pots from my exhibitions would have been less than 70% of the price of equivalent pots there (the CPA commission was higher than mine and I wasn't VAT registered). It meant that the potters charged me more for their pots so it was them and not the "greedy gallery owner" who set the prices. To be truthful we did it together so it did mean pots from my exhibitions were a little cheaper than from the CPA but not 70% of the price as they could have been if it had been down to me.

Interesting SP. Are there many modern potters who have made REALLY BIG money
from their craft? Grayson Perry maybe? or is it just a daily grind to make ends meet?
If you went for careers advice, and said "I want to be a studio potter" I wonder what
the response would be?

Most people do it because they want to or even need to and a number have good qualifications that would have resulted in well paid jobs if they had continued with their original careers. However, I don't think that they would regard it as a daily grind.

In many ways I did the same. I have a Food Science degree but when I started work I wasn't happy and eventually took the decision to leave work and earn money doing what I wanted. I took that decision knowing that I was unlikely to ever be rich but I would be happy. That's how it's turned out and I would think many potters feel the same. 

Potter, who pot and teach as well, get the best of both worlds I imagine but it is very rare that potters make real money................ unless they happen to dress in women's clothing, have the money to employ a PR company to write b*llsh*t about them or are well connected. Even better if you have two of these advantages, then your inability to be able to make half decent doesn't matter.

Uh oh! I take it you're not a big fan of Grayson Perry then SP?

I don't mind Grayson but do think that if you are a man, who chooses to wear dresses on occasions, that you ought to pick something that suits you.

It was talking of the one we don't talk about.

I think he's quite a fascinating artist, who happens to use pottery as a canvas.

http://www.saatchigallery.com/aipe/grayson_perry.htm

I like him.

Me to

I think he's sh*te

someone I know bought a pot by Magdalene Odundo for a colosall 400 pounds in the early 70s just because she fell in love with it, a good invesment as it turns out, now displayed on a shelf next to one of mine

I wonder who actually paid those huge prices for her work , can we see yours Paul ? no pun

I've asked the american collector to send a pic still waiting